from the this-is-a-good-thing dept

I've been a big fan of StackExchange, for a while, as a very cool platform for getting expert insight into a variety of (mostly, but not entirely, technical) questions. The platform is so useful that, last week, Google even announced that it was pushing its own YouTube API developer support efforts off of its own Google Groups platform and over to Stack Overflow (the original StackExchange site). But that appears to be just one area in which the two companies are collaborating. As they announced today, StackExchange and Google are working together on AskPatents.com, a site dedicated to better crowdsourcing prior art.

And it's not just StackExchange and Google working together: they've teamed up with the USPTO to make it easier for good prior art to be submitted to the USPTO to (hopefully) invalidate bad patents. While we were incredibly underwhelmed by the America Invents Act, which was last year's attempt at patent reform, it has (finally) made it much easier to allow third parties to submit prior art which may be helpful to examiners during the ~18 hours they spend in reviewing each patent. There was the famed Peer-to-Patent program, which I was quite skeptical about, but this seems to take that to another level, thanks in part to the useful setup of StackExchange's system that helps float good ideas to the top.

But where this gets much more powerful is through integration in two key spots. First up, this will be integrated into Google's patent pages. Recently, Google launched its prior art finder, which tried to help people find prior art through automated searches -- but you can now also click through directly to the AskPatents site by clicking a "discuss" button that will be shown on each patent page, which will take you straight to the StackExchange page. Neat. The second integration may be even more powerful. As people find useful prior art and it bubbles to the top, StackExchange's system will make it easy to then directly submit it to the USPTO. Clicking a button will take you to an already filled out USPTO form, where a bit of additional info can be added and submitted.

StackExchange founder Joel Spolsky sees this as an opportunity to help stamp out bad patents: "Collectively, we’re building a crowd-sourced worldwide detective agency to track down and obliterate bogus applications. Over time, we hope that the Patent Stack Exchange will mitigate the problems caused by rampant patent trolling. It’s not a complete fix, but it’s a good start."

There are still tremendous structural problems with the patent system. And, at best, a system like this just helps to prevent some of the bigger mistakes, rather than attacking any of the fundamental problems. But, given just how damaging absolutely ridiculous patents are these days, anything that helps stop bad patents has to be seen as a good thing.

from the guess-who-caught-the-bad-guys dept

While Glyn just recently wrote about Jimmy Wales' effort to stymie UK snooping, it appears there may be other issues to address in England. If Wikipedia has had to fight any stigma, it's been the notion that a crowdsourced encyclopedia in which most anyone could contribute would be so rife with errors and bias as to be unusable. After all, there have indeed been reports of individuals and companies editing negative information out of thier own pages. This perception persists, despite evidence that Wikipedia is every bit as accurate as printed encyclopedias.

And so we have another such story, in which Roger Bramkin, Wikimedia trustee, is being accused of running a pay-for-play system using Wikipedia's "Did You Know" and GLAM projects to keep his day job clients in the wiki bloodstream. Essentially, it appears Bramkin took the country of Gibraltar on as a consulting client and then routinely pumped their stories into Wikipedia.

Roger Bamkin, trustee of the Wikimedia Foundation UK, whose LinkedIn page describes him as a high-return-earning PR consultant, appeared to be using Wikipedia's main page "Did You Know" feature and the resources of Wikipedia's GLAM WikiProject (Galleries, Libraries, Archives and Museums) initiative to pimp his client's project.

Now, it would be easy for anyone so inclined to throw their hands around and make a great deal of noise about how this proves Wikipedia's unreliability. Crowdsourcing, it would seem, has led to corruption of the bloodstream. This hand-wringing would be particularly easy in light of a second such Wikipedian in Residence (an editor held in high esteem) being found to have run a similar operation focused on SEO and Wikipedia pages for paying clients. Wikipedians in Residence are typically required to recuse themselves from editing pages in which they have a conflict of interest, and these incidences seem to violently violate those rules.

But here's what is being swept under the rug with all the hand-waving: it was the Wikipedia community members who found all this out and are bringing it to light. This entire incident began on a Wikipedia discussion page over abuse of DYK and that is exactly how Wikipedia is supposed to work. So, while conflicts of interest issues and erroneous entries in Wikipedia are certainly a huge concern, it is selective bias at work to point to them as examples for why crowdsourcing information doesn't work while also failing to mention that the same crowd was responsible for its ceasing.

from the you-really-can't-specify-which-'crowd'-you-want-to-'source' dept

You know what The Internet does better than nearly anything else? If you answered, "Provide me with a creative and useful list of potential product names," go ahead and add that to the PowerPoint deck and hope no one asks for a citation. If you answered, "Find some way to add bodily fluids, Hitler and 'manual override' to our branded site featuring our prominent logo," go ahead and add that to your "Life Experiences" portfolio you're currently boxing up under the watchful eye of your security escort over at PepsiCo's headquarters.

Understandably, PepsiCo probably felt safe doing this. After all, when it had run a rather straightforward campaign, in which Facebook users voted for the next Mtn Dew flavor, it had the good sense to limit The Internet's input to three buttons. Perhaps feeling a bit overconfident, PepsiCo went to the same well again, hoping to name its new green apple-flavored soda. Only this time, it thought the Mtn Dew-swilling internet denizens might appreciate a bit more interaction. But giving The Internet an open text box for submissions without even bothering to do even the most cursory vetting of replies is only going to end the way everyone (but the corporate marketing team) knew it would: depravity mixed with Godwin's law, garnished with a side of Wilford Brimley.

Here's the voting results as seen shortly before the site went down:

Beyond the weird Grandma fetish and the masturbation jokes is a long list of (believe it or not) more offensive suggestions, snagged for posterity by a helpful reddit user. (Link only. Gallery runs seven pages deep and includes some other hilarious suggestions for the new Dew name, including "Coke," "Sierra Mist," "Never Going To Give You Upple,"WE'VE RUN OUT OF COLORS," "Solient Green," and, of course, "mtn jew." Reading list out loud probably NSFW.)

Here's a slightly earlier version, which seems to have appeared before some rudimentary cleanup was performed by the Dew team, which not only brings one of The Internet's favorite references to the top of the list, but also drops a completely trollish scrolling headline right over the top of the website:

Mtn Dew's official Twitter account ceded the battle on the 14th, having given up its dream of something usable like "Tempest" or "Green Flash" score near the top of the list. (Sadly, I don't think "Methamphetagreen" will make the cut.) A very concise concession, done neatly in less than 140 characters but still resonant enough to make one feel momentarily bad about splattering well-aged fluids all over the "little guy" who happened to be in the wrong place ('The Internet') at the wrong time ('ALWAYS').

@antderosa Dub the Dew definitely lost to The Internet. It was a local customer program, not a Dew one, & we're helping them clean up

Adding to the fun is the fact that no established prankster-heavy online entity wants to take credit for whitewashing Hitler's past/celebrating the unexpectedly feisty sexual activity of women in their "golden years." Reddit says 4chan did it. 4chan claims Reddit is behind the Hitler/Granny/diabeetus debacle. It all very definitely looks like a 4chan effort, but the truth is probably closer to "a bit of both." Does anyone seriously believe Reddit and 4chan share no common members?

But after all is said and done, PepsiCo might have lost this particular battle, but overall it wins the war. Plenty of people spent more time thinking about MTN Dew (and Hitler... and... dear lord... Grandma) then they would have otherwise. A few months down the road, "Tempest" (probably) will appear in stores and be purchased by curious Dew fans, wondering internally if "Fapple" or "Grannies Spurt" better describes the flavor. Externally, everything else will be as it always was. And The Internet will sit by quietly, waiting for someone to call its name.

from the features-100%-more-'beekeeper-sex'-than-the-closest-competitor dept

One of the old adages of publishing is "know your audience." In today's ultra-crowded digital markets, that adage is more important than ever. There's money to be made simply by following trends, and if you can get over any hangups about "artistic integrity," you can ride the wave until it collapses.

"It all started with Scam School Book 2 – Brian’s magic book," Justin said. "He found out as he was pushing that book that the top ten in iTunes was all erotic fiction. Even to the point where established authors, like Janet Evanovich, couldn’t break into the top five of the iBooks store—because of all the erotic fiction that was capitalizing on Shades of Grey. And he thought—we could do that!"

The twist here is that Brushwood and Young didn't write a single word. The entire book is compiled from the contributions of their listeners. Held together only by the appearance of the same main character in every chapter, The Diamond Club has more in common with anthologies of Penthouse Letters (such things actually exist) and its inspiration, Naked Came the Stranger, than an actual cohesive novel. No matter. It crashed the iTunes best-seller chart, placing at #4 -- directly following the Fifty Shades of Gray trilogy.

The men behind the book claim to be trolling, but the sales seem to indicate that the book's audience stretches further than those who are in on the joke. Certainly some people aren't aware of the origin, but it's listed as erotic fiction and delivers the payload expected. Without having to spend a lot of time on character development, plot pacing or "compelling" dialogue, it likely delivers on the "erotic" side more efficiently than other books in the genre.

Justin said, "It’s a hoax in that we are not erotic fiction writers. We don't genuinely think it’s any good. But I will stand behind our product that it delivers what we believe to be the most important component in this genre: sex."

And the book does deliver. Though it has over 1,000 user reviews, only one of them calls out the hoax. "If you look at it, right now," Justin said, "There’s only one comment that says it’s a joke. One review says: Don’t pay money for this. It’s what they want."

Some may see this as yet another indicator of how opening ebooks to the masses is going to result in piles of lousy writing popping up everywhere. Maybe so, but I just can't see it as being solely a bad thing. If the customers are happy with their purchases, it doesn't seem to be much of a problem. The advantage here is a ridiculously short turnaround time that would be nearly impossible to emulate running through a second party, which allowed The Diamond Club to take full advantage of a trend before the audience moved on.

The other big takeaway from this? Another new way to connect with your fans, which springs out of the duo's understanding of both their core podcast audience and the ongoing disruption in content creation:

Users are the content creators today – so they made the listeners of their podcast the authors.

Nothing builds loyalty like including your fans in the creative process, and nothing builds word-of-mouth faster than loyal fans.

from the rock-and-a-copyright-law dept

Before getting into the details of this new story, let me bring up a pair of recent Techdirt stories as background. First, there's the story of Netflix being told that not having closed captioning on its streaming movies means it violates the Americans with Disabilities Act. As we noted at the time, this raised interesting copyright questions, considering that Netflix may not be legally allowed to put captions on videos. A few days before that, we had written about a student who ran a site that provided crowdsourced downloadable subtitle files for TV and movies, and had been found guilty of copyright infringement.

Knowing both those things, isn't it interesting that Netflix is now experimenting with crowdsourcing captioning/subtitles for films and TV shows? Perhaps it figures that having lost that first legal fight, it should lean in the other direction and see if it gets sued there as well. Either way, it seems like it opens up some pretty serious copyright questions. While some of us think that providing captions/subtitles should be pretty clear fair use, others (obviously) disagree. And, when it's an operation like Netflix -- which is obviously a commercial entity -- you have to wonder if it's going to get sued...

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

The amount of music in the world is growing every minute -- it's not even possible for a single person to listen to every song within a normal lifespan. Luckily, no one would really want to listen to every song, but technology is accelerating the process of creating music with algorithms that can compose songs faster than any human musician and robots that can play non-stop. If virtual monkeys can re-create Shakespeare (albeit in short snippets), it's only a matter of time before virtual musicians are churning out pop hits. Here are just a few recent accomplishments of our new robot musician overlords.

from the why-isn't-ron-kirk-doing-this? dept

We've written a few times now about Rep. Darrell Issa, and the Madison platform his office has set up to allow for crowdsourcing opinion on legislation and other government documents. He originally used it for his OPEN Act, but then later posted the text of ACTA as well. His latest move is to post the leaked text of the US's negotiating position on TPP. This is the same text that leaked out last year. It would be nice if the USTR did something like this itself with the latest text, but that's not how USTR Ron Kirk works. To him "transparency" is only sharing the text with big industry special interests, and declaring it a matter of "national security" if anyone else wants to see it.

Issa recognizes how this is dangerous to a functioning democracy, when our federal government is negotiating deals in back rooms, despite the fact they will have a massive impact on the public:

“At a time when the American people and Internet users all around the world are rightfully wary of any closed-door negotiations that could adversely impact their ability to freely and openly access the Internet, the Obama Administration continues to pursue a secretive, closed-door negotiating process for the Trans Pacific Partnership,” Issa said. “I have decided to publish the intellectual property rights chapter of TPP in Madison so that the public can provide input to those negotiating this agreement, and to push this Administration - and the federal government as a whole - to be open, transparent and inclusive when it comes to international intellectual property rights agreements that have potentially serious consequences for the Internet community.”

Again, it's great that he's added this text to the Madison platform, but it's disappointing that it's still the old leaked version, rather than anything more up to date. The version he posted is now 15 months old, and there have been a bunch of additional negotiations since then. Still, it's good to see others in the federal government trying to encourage discussion on this agreement, even if the USTR continues to hide in secrecy (unless you're a big corporate lobbyist, of course).

from the as-long-as-they-don't-drop-vowels dept

We've discussed a few times in the past Rep. Darryl Issa's Madison platform for crowdsourcing ideas around legislation. Over the last few months he's used it to create a productive discussion around the OPEN Act, the more reasonable alternative to SOPA/PIPA, and also used it to post the text of ACTA for discussion. While the platform may need some tweaking and advancement, it's still quite a feat to see someone in Congress actually innovating, and that should be encouraged. Joshua Lamel -- who admits that he's politically at the other end of the spectrum from Rep. Issa -- has a really nice profile of how Issa is trying to treat his job in the House like a "lean startup," with projects like Madison. It is a bit of a slog going up against the entrenched ways that Congress acts today, however:

"I try to bring a lean startup mentality to my work making government more efficient, open and participatory," he said.

"This technology-centered approach, however, is disruptive to the government bureaucracy and many in Congress because it demands experimentation, data-driven analysis and actually listening to our users -- the American people -- about how to make government work better for them. That's why social media and innovation are so central to my work: we in Congress do not have all the answers, but we can have a relentless drive to adapt technology to let taxpayers re-engage with government on their own terms. I firmly believe that just as new technologies are revolutionizing nearly every aspect of life in America, nascent tools like Madison show the transformative impact technology will have on government, and ultimately overcome the inertia of the bureaucracy."

While not a traditional industry, it sure seems like Congress could use some significant disruption -- and having people in there treating it like a startup might just be a good way to start.

from the well-done dept

Amidst all the recent talk of just how successful Kickstarter has been as a platform for creators raising money, some people have suggested that the company may run into problems down the road because it seems ripe for fraud. Of course, most things are ripe for fraud in one way or another, so Kickstarter isn't exactly special in that regard—and when fraud does happen, people will fight it just like they do anywhere else.

... a campaign for an action video game, MYTHIC: The Story Of Gods and Men, has just been busted by forum users at Reddit, SomethingAwful and Rock, Paper, Shotgun. The creators claimed to be an independent studio, “Little Monster Productions,” of 12 industry veterans in Hollywood. “Our team has done a significant amount of work on the World of Warcraft series as well as Diablo 2 and the original Starcraft,” says the project page.

Bullshit, said the Internet. Turns out the art was cribbed, the text for backer rewards was copied and pasted from another Kickstarter project, and even the office photos were from another game studio, Burton Design Group.

When people brought their accusations to the Kickstarter comments, the developers made a few weak attempts at deflection then quietly shut down having raised just under $5,000 (far short of their goal, so that money won't actually be released). With Kickstarter gaining more attention every day, we're sure to see more attempts at scams—and maybe even some successes—but with a savvy community that polices itself like this, the scammers face an uphill battle.

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

Kickstarter isn't the only crowdfunding platform on the internet. There are plenty of folks jumping on the crowdfunding bandwagon, and with the decline of basic science funding, scientists are hoping to convince some backers that their pet projects are worth a multitude of small contributions. Here are just a few examples.